British politician: ‘Israel is the root cause of terrorism'
LONDON – In the second attack on Israel by Liberal Democrat politicians in the same week that the party’s leader said the party got it wrong on Israel, Jenny Tonge claimed on Friday that Israel’s treatment of Palestinians is the root cause of terrorism worldwide.
Possibly “Holocaust guilt” allows this treatment to go unchecked, Tonge said, adding that it might also be the “power of the pro-Israel lobby” in the UK and US. The Liberal Democrat peer was speaking in the House of Lords at the Strategic Defense and Security Review, which sets out how the British government will deliver the priorities identified in its national security strategy.
On the issue of world conflict prevention, Tonge then said: “It is a disgrace to us all that problems such as Kashmir and Palestine are still alienating Muslims all over the world. “The treatment of Palestinians by Israel is held up as an example of how the West treats Muslims,” she said, “and is at the root cause of terrorism worldwide.” “Even Tony Blair has now admitted this publicly,” she said.
“Why do we let it continue? Is it Holocaust guilt? We should be guilty – of course we should. Is it the power of the pro-Israel lobby here and in the USA?” The peer went on say that “cynics might think” Britain is at the ready to help Israel attack Iran.
1. Anti-Semitic themes found in mainstream British circles
Anti-Semitic themes found in mainstream British circles By JONNY PAUL 11/12/2010 03:59 Comparisons of Israel to Nazi Germany are becoming increasingly common anti-Semitic conspiracies are used more freely in conversation.
LONDON – A report published by a Jewish community organization on Thursday highlights how old anti-Semitic themes to depict Israel and Zionism have become more widespread in mainstream British circles during the past year.
Comparisons of Israel and its supporters to Nazi Germany have become increasingly common among the public, and anti-Semitic conspiracy themes are being used more freely in conversation, the “Anti-Semitic Discourse in Britain in 2009” indicated.
The 57-page report was published by the Community Security Trust, which monitors anti- Semitism and provides security for the Jewish community in Britain. “As in previous years, the report examines public discussion of anti-Semitism, Jews and Jewish issues in mainstream media and politics,” CST communications director Mark Gardner said.
“It is not the report’s intention to brand those who feature in it as being anti-Semites. Nevertheless, old anti-Semitic motifs remain remarkably persistent, especially in relation to Zionism and Israel, and it is hoped that this report will help explain why CST, the Jewish community and many other observers note and fear the ongoing development of this trend.”
14. Disagree - I remember more antisemitic conspiracy talk in mainstream circles in the 80s than now.
It probably IS worse now than 3 or 4 years ago, because of the economy. Jews and other minorities always get scapegoated by some when times are bad.
Antisemitism, though it is a problem everywhere, is less of a problem here than in many Europaean countries, and at least not worse than in America. The biggest hate-targets here are immigrants and asylum seekers, and especially right now, benefit claimants.
30. They don't overstate the problem; they UNDERSTATE the problem in the past
Because they weren't doing such detailed studies at that time.
George Orwell was writing about the problem of antisemitism in Britain in the 1940s.
There is a general tendency for people to imply that something can't be a problem unless there's a sudden massive epidemic of it - applies to medical issues, world poverty issues (people will give a lot more to disaster relief than long-term development), etc. as well. Long-term, fairly constant problems are just as much problems as sudden epidemics.
31. Here is a link to a recent survey by the ADL...
which I think shows that while there is a significant antisemitism problem in Britain as everywhere, it is indeed not as bad as in several other countries in Europe. Poland and Hungary, not surprisingly, have huge problems; Spain seems to be one of the worst in Western Europe.
It IS A PROBLEM as I have said. There have been more attacks on Jews and synagogues since the economic crisis began. But the British attitude to immigrants and asylum seekers is significantly much worse.
2. Actually I would say the US is the root cause of terrorism
When we helped stop Russia from invading Afghanistan, we thought we where fighting communism, but what we where really doing was stopping Russia from rooting out the fundamentalists. We also helped take down the Iranian democracy.
We didn't 'stop Russia from invading Afghanistan' as the Soviets did invade and spent almost a decade there. Also, to claim that the the Soviets were 'rooting out the fundamentalists' is only partially true and misses the larger point. Soviet troops entered to shore up the brutal Afghan Communist regime and also to resolve a nasty internal dispute at the top, which they achieved in a commando raid on the presidential palace in December 1979, killing just about everybody inside, including the President.
The resistance did have a fundamentalist character, but not entirely -- the Afghan Communist government was hated for a lot of reasons by a lot of people, not all of them having to do with religion. It is true that US aid often ended up in the hands of the most fundamentalist Mujahideen group (there were seven main ones), mainly because it was funneled through Pakistan, who cultivated the most fundamentalist group as their proxies/pets, a game they continued to play long after the war ended and are still playing today. You almost seem to be making the argument that the Soviets were 'fighting the good fight' in Afghanistan, which is pretty far from the truth, as the Soviet campaign was widely acknowledged as precipitating a human rights disaster - I've forgotten the exact number, but at times in the 1980s, Afghans constituted a large percentage of the world's raw total of 'displaced persons.'
Edited on Sat Nov-13-10 08:18 PM by Donald Ian Rankin
The extent to which Western complicity in Israel's treatment of the Palestinians contributes to Muslims deciding to resort to violence is often massively understated by the Israel lobby, but there are a great many other contributing factors too.
7. The vast majority of terror worldwide is committed by Muslims against Muslims...
Edited on Sat Nov-13-10 09:02 PM by shira
...and it has nothing to do with Israel or the West.
Algeria, Sudan, Somalia, Bangladesh, Lebanon, Sunni vs. Shiite, Religious vs. Secular, even Fatah vs. Hamas.
This obsessive and irrational focus on Israel only serves to cover up real genocide and murder on a massive scale. Israel pays with its image as millions of Muslim and Arab victims of terror worldwide pay with their blood while the world remains silent.
She's doing it again, folks, can you believe it? -- behaving as if the act of pointing out the misdeeds of another country somehow excuses Israel's. It is to laugh.
All right, once more, here's the difference, Shira, and I hope to hell you're paying attention this time. You ready?
Israel -- unlike Algeria, Sudan, Somalia and those other countries you mentioned -- is a DE FACTO WESTERN NATION! So what does that mean? Simply that Israel functions, in most respect, like a satellite of the United States and its inhabitants (the ruling class, anyway) are primarily educated, well off, and WHITE.
Ergo, there is a fundamental imbalance of power INHERENT in Israel's relationship with its neighbors, and if you fail to see a chasm in power bigger than the Sinai Desert between Israel and the Palestinians (for example) then you are either A) blind, or B) insane.
Try this "Chomsky" analysis (I never studied under Chomsky -- just Ullman)
Well, let's apply the "Failed State" standards (applied in Noam Chomsky, Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy) to the United States too, instead of just Israel.
* The US fire bombed Dresden and Tokyo - killing thousands in each city * The US was the only nation to use nukes (and Father Pedro Aruppe - Google Him) says the Japanese were ready to surrender when we bombed Nagasaki) - Neither Israel nor Iran has used nukes. * Relocation of the Japanese (including US citizens) to internment camps -- we call that "collective punishment". * When we "liberated" the Philippines, there was substantial evidence of "My Lai" type war crimes by the American "liberators." * We went into VietNam to protect the corrupt Diem regime (and stole four year out of my life - and killed 55,000 Americans) * My Lai was not unique. * Why did we invade Iraq? There was no AlQaida there. But there was oil. And Rove and Cheney convinced Bush that "war time Presidents always win re-election." (A more compelling reason then screaming "NeoCons" or "PNAC") Besides Leo Strauss, the father of neo-conservatism, and Wolfie's mentor, died in 1983. * Abu Ghraib. Gitmo, "Military Tribunals", torture. (probably a violation of the Geneva Conventions) * The US is the only industrialized, "First World" country without a fully inclusive health delivery system, i.e., "Public Option." * We rank behind Western Europe and Israel in most measures of health care. * We rank behind Western Europe and Israel in most measure of educational attainment. * It appears that Jim Demint and John Boehner control Congress, with help from Mitch McConnell and Jeff Sessions. * It appear that the political tone is set by Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Randy Paul, Sherry Angle, Christine O'Donnell, etc. * We still have lynchings of minorities and LGBT's. * Have you ever seen how the cops patrol minority neighborhoods? * Would Chomsky call the US a failed state??
Your ratio of posts about injustices suffered by Israel versus those suffered by any other country (including Somalia, Bangladesh or Lebanon) is, conservatively, 400 to 1. So don’t lecture me about Equal Time.
Likewise, your line “You may think it's okay to obsess over Israel” had me rolling on the floor, since Israel seems to be ALL you obsess over.
20. Lady Tonge sounds like a raging asshole, however...
-- I will NOT apologize for being a Cultural Relativist.
This is from THE TEXTBOOK OF CULTURAL PSYCHIATRY by Bhugra Dinesh and Bhui Kamaldeep, published by the Cambridge University Press (maybe you’ve heard of it) in 2008.
I want you to pay close attention to some of the names being mentioned here, Shira, because it is a truly impressive list and impossible to ignore (even for you)
“Laurence Kirmayer relates the growth of cultural relativism to great social events of the 20th century, including the fall of colonialism and the growth of a universal code of human rights. Working amid this social ferment, psychological and psychiatric anthropologists such as Margaret Mead, Janis Jenkins and Arthur Kleinman have argued the case for cultural relativism, a framework that stresses uniqueness, both of individuals and of their respective cultures.”
WHO were those people arguing for Cultural Relativsim again? Why, only Margaret Mead, Janis Jenkins and Arthur Kleinman. Neanderthals all!
Fools! Mental midgets! Hardly worth listening to!
Seriously, being a Progressive is all about speaking Truth to Power, isn't it? Seeking out the most privileged among us (who are -- let’s face it -- usually White and Male) and holding their feet to the fire. Nothing wrong with that.
Israel is primarily White, Rich and (in terms of its power structure, anyway) Male. Again, Israel is a de facto Western Country (like the United States, which has a LOT to answer for) and therefore MUST be held to account.
23. You don't see anything wrong with the cultural relativism alan is talking about?
Edited on Sun Nov-14-10 07:36 PM by shira
To be clear, that's the problem I have with hypocrites who - for example - don't give a rip about Palestinians oppressed by their leadership (Hamas/Fatah) and couldn't care less whether Palestinian women, gays, religious minorities, etc...have their basic rights violated.
The United Nations was today accused by human rights groups of failing to hold the Sri Lankan government accountable for alleged abuses against civilians during the suppression of the Tamil Tiger insurgency.
The accusations followed a resolution in the UN human rights council welcoming the Sri Lankan government victory, with no reference to human rights concerns over civilian casualties and the 300,000 Tamils made homeless, many of whom are interned in government camps.
But criticism was also aimed at the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, who visited the biggest camp over the weekend and complimented the Sri Lankan government on its humanitarian role, and the security council for not speaking out officially about the human cost of the military victory.
"The human rights council performed abysmally," said Tom Porteous, London director of Human Rights Watch. "It's there to monitor human rights and the laws of war, and it completely failed – and failed to register any concern over the situation."
The Sri Lankan government took the unusual step of submitting its own resolution to a council session in Geneva convened to examine its conduct in the conflict. Colombo won substantial support from friendly governments, derailing an attempt to launch an inquiry into war crimes allegations.
"It was a deplorable result, a self-congratulatory resolution that Sri Lanka imposed on the council," said Peter Splinter, Amnesty International's representative in Geneva.
Sen Kandiah, a Tamil community leader in Britain, said: "The Tamil diaspora feel the system is not working. We feel justice is not going to be done."
In the only language you seem to understand, imagine the UN praising Israel for stopping Hamas during OCL, without any concerns whatsoever for human rights violations allegedly committed by Israel.
You'd be just as okay with that as with the UN decision on Sri Lanka?
more on Moon's visit to Sri Lanka, on a Google search of "Ban Ki Moon praises Sri Lanka government" your Guardian link with it's one sentence unlinked claim is what consistently comes up and note both links I am posting came up on the same search
Mr Ban did not land and look around the conflict zone. As a guest of the Sri Lankan authorities, he was well aware of the risk of being used by the government to portray international support for their military victory.
So he flew over instead, looking from the safety of the sky.
From there, Mr Ban went on to meet President Rajapaksa. UN officials were hoping to underline with him the importance of winning the peace as well as the war, by reaching out to Tamils and giving them rights in a comprehensive political settlement.
"If issues of reconciliation and social inclusion are not dealt with, history could repeat itself," warned Mr Ban.
The two men issued a joint statement after their meeting.
On the situation in the camps, the statement said the government would continue to provide access to humanitarian agencies, which did not acknowledge that it was not quite doing that.
President Rajapaksa says he will begin talks with all parties - including the Tamils - to bring about lasting peace.
Mr Ban in his dogged way has prodded the Sri Lankan government to address the concerns about the camps and work for reconciliation. The test of his influence is whether anything here changes.
29. shira this the I/P forum now I do understand that you would much rather that we debate
the issue by concentrating on how nasty the Palestinian leadership is, however I have never seen support for any of the items you mention on this forum and are you actually faulting Fatah for arresting Hamas members in the WB, would you rather they be allowed to roam free there maybe gain some real power? Hmmm what ever would the end result of that be?
37. can you ever be honest shira? I certainly did not say that it is invalid to
criticize the Palestinian leadership and pointed out that indeed Hamas especially does abuse it's citizens, and that I have not seen support for those practices on this forum, do you feel that Palestinian abuses should be the focus here?
She is not a 'British politician'; she is a *former* British politician. She was sacked as a party spokesperson due to similar outrageous remarks, but you can't be sacked from the House of Lords. Fortunately, she is pretty irrelevant by now. She was speaking in the Lords *about* the strategic defence and security review, not *at* it, which makes it sound as though she'd been specially invited as an advisor - she hasn't.
'“cynics might think” Britain is at the ready to help Israel attack Iran.'
No, only nutters would think that. (With whose army anyway? We're overstretched in Afghanistan as it is, and the defence budget is being cut, not increased!)
As I said before, Tonge is a good name for her, as she is all tongue and no brain.
'Israel’s treatment of Palestinians is the root cause of terrorism worldwide.'
What about America's and Britain's treatment of Iraq, which certainly led to an increase in terrorism? What about some people just being terrorists, as others are warmongers (same thing with an official army), because they like power? What about all the terrorism in the world that is NOT connected with Muslims or Arabs - as a Brit, Tonge should be well aware of all the terrorism that was associated with the long conflict in Northern Ireland, for example.
43. All terrorism? No. Terrorism against the west? She might be right
Also, if I remember correctly, she was one of the few people to actually call for a real investigation of the organ theft claims, claims which turned out to be true. She seems to have a loose tonge but at least she is willing to speak her mind.
44. The organ theft claims didn't turn out to be true
There was a real organ *trafficking* scandal in Israel (it is also a problem in many other places). But not organ *theft*; and certainly not organ theft by Israelis in *Haiti*, which is what Tonge alleged.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.